Police State - Official Thread

[avxo]

Could be a number of legitimate reasons, or it could be unscrupulous. The court hearing was for a traffic ticket. Our officers are required to make their court appearances for traffic tickets unless there is reason for not making it to court. then it is reviewed by their supervisor. If it is not valid, they are disciplined. The most common reason is  they are tied up on a call and can't break. This is not unusual as it is unpredictable how long a particular dispatched call will take. We do everything we can to relieve the officer but often times there are no units available to relieve them. Short of that, unless on vacation (they should have filed a motion for continuance) they will be there. This particular case is a travesty. The FHP report has the officer listed as the driver. If the FHP Officer was needed to make the case in addition to the filed police report the prosecutor should have called for a continuance. In a case as important as this, that should have been done. I'm not a lawyer, but I think that is within their right to request. I think this smells... and justice which is what court us SUPPOSED to be about, was not served that day

This!

[Agnostic007]

This!

Agree!

[illuminati]

We have an Office of the Police Monitor that work alongside Internal Affairs to insure fairness.
2. They are comprised of civilians. That is as good as it's going to get.
I believe you need police input in policing police because there are times when the average civilian with a lack of training, experience and knowledge of laws and policies just isn't the best person to review the case.
3. I've seen too many times on this board alone people concluding with a ridiculous statement what they think the officer should have done.
4. I also get that there needs to be the civilian oversight to ensure we are taking that perspective into account and it alleviates the perception we are secretly sweeping things under the rug. And the police need to do a better job of making the information available within the limits of privacy laws.
5. We work for the citizens, I've never understood why there is a need to not disclose information that is not connected with an ongoing investigation.   

Thanks for your reply.
Though... 1,it didn't address the issues raised.

2. Yes it definitely needs outside supervision.
Your statement. 'That's as good as it's going to get' ?? Why is it.
If everyone thought like that there would not be any progress in life / society.
We wouldn't have evolved the wheel wouldn't of been invented.
That's closed mind thinking.

3. Yes we have.
We have also seen the on this board & in the news
The ridiculous & lethal consequences of irrational & idiotic police
Rational. Which you failed to comment on.

4. Correct.
Sadly Though we do see the evidence of police sweeping things
Under the carpet when it comes to matters concerning themselves.

5. Well said. You do work for the citizens.
A good number of your colleagues around the country
Would do well keep that at the forefront of their minds.

😉 👍🏻

[Skip8282]

Thanks for your reply.
Though... 1,it didn't address the issues raised.

2. Yes it definitely needs outside supervision.
Your statement. 'That's as good as it's going to get' ?? Why is it.
If everyone thought like that there would not be any progress in life / society.
We wouldn't have evolved the wheel wouldn't of been invented.
That's closed mind thinking.

3. Yes we have.
We have also seen the on this board & in the news
The ridiculous & lethal consequences of irrational & idiotic police
Rational. Which you failed to comment on.

4. Correct.
Sadly Though we do see the evidence of police sweeping things
Under the carpet when it comes to matters concerning themselves.

5. Well said. You do work for the citizens.
A good number of your colleagues around the country
Would do well keep that at the forefront of their minds.

😉 👍🏻

Spot on again!

The Civilian Review Boards in my area are nothing but recommendations.  That can't actually effect discipline, policy changes, etc.  It should be the exact opposite of what he's advocating.  Civilians should always control and dictate to the cops and the cops should provide recommendations based on their knowledge, experience, etc.

Problem is, the public at large is woefully apathetic.

[Agnostic007]

Spot on again!

The Civilian Review Boards in my area are nothing but recommendations.  That can't actually effect discipline, policy changes, etc.  It should be the exact opposite of what he's advocating.  Civilians should always control and dictate to the cops and the cops should provide recommendations based on their knowledge, experience, etc.

Problem is, the public at large is woefully apathetic.

We'll always disagree on the point of who makes the final decision.. I'd quit today if my career hinged on the decisions of civilians. I could work with a group of former police officers turned monitors. Trust me, if I was a citizen with no police experience I would think just the same way, "why can't citizens review incidents and allegations and come to the right conclusion? The police must be hiding something if they won't allow that" But the truth is the average citizen just doesn't have the required knowledge, background, training and experience to make the tough calls. We can all agree the Rodney King beating was horrible. We can all agree that the officer shooting the guy in the back running away was excessive to say the least, there are those cases where a 5 yr old can tell you it's wrong. I'm talking about the ones that aren't clear cut and without that background, knowledge, experience and training, would conclude the wrong answer.  We're just going to have to agree to disagree on that

[avxo]

We'll always disagree on the point of who makes the final decision.. I'd quit today if my career hinged on the decisions of civilians. I could work with a group of former police officers turned monitors. Trust me, if I was a citizen with no police experience I would think just the same way, "why can't citizens review incidents and allegations and come to the right conclusion? The police must be hiding something if they won't allow that"

No. The police aren't in a position to allow or disallow anything. They're public servants who will do as they are told and operate within the framework setup by their bosses: the public. If they don't like working under those terms then they should quit.

But the truth is the average citizen just doesn't have the required knowledge, background, training and experience to make the tough calls.

Of course. I lack the knowledge, background, training and experience to shove guns in people's mouths, throw flashbangs into cribs, shoot sleeping seven year old girl in the head, smash people's phones because they contain recording of a shoot-out, severely injure inmates or people in custody, cause almost fatal car crash and have the victim arrested and charged and I could go on, but frankly I'm getting sick to my stomach.

The notion that the average citizen can't be trusted to evaluate an incident involving the police is bullshit. The average citizen knows that cops have a difficult job and knows accidents happen. But the average citizen can also see through bullshit, which is what you are afraid of. And one more thing: you claim that if it came down to a civilian reviewing your decisions you'd quit. But isn't that what happens anyways if you end up in Court? Your career hinges on what between 1 and 12 civilians will say.

We can all agree that the officer shooting the guy in the back running away was excessive to say the least, there are those cases where a 5 yr old can tell you it's wrong.

And yet, in many of those cases, police unions praise the officer and blame the victim (or use the victim's past history, or his circumstances, or any number of other factors) to whitewash the situation. And in many of those cases, nothing happens to the officers. Just to give you one example: I'm pretty sure a 5 year old would say that forcibly medicating someone repeatedly, making them defecate in front of you, x-raying him repeatedly and giving him a colonoscopy is wrong. And yet that's what happened to David Eckert and guess what? The cops that did this still on their job.

So apparently there are things we can all agree are wrong, except... we apparently disagree when it comes time to agree.

I'm talking about the ones that aren't clear cut and without that background, knowledge, experience and training, would conclude the wrong answer.  We're just going to have to agree to disagree on that

It's always easy to hide behind the "you can't judge what I do until you've walked a mile in my shoes." Bullshit. You (not you specifically - just being general) just don't want to be judged because you think you're above it.

[Skip8282]

No. The police aren't in a position to allow or disallow anything. They're public servants who will do as they are told and operate within the framework setup by their bosses: the public. If they don't like working under those terms then they should quit.


Of course. I lack the knowledge, background, training and experience to shove guns in people's mouths, throw flashbangs into cribs, shoot sleeping seven year old girl in the head, smash people's phones because they contain recording of a shoot-out, severely injure inmates or people in custody, cause almost fatal car crash and have the victim arrested and charged and I could go on, but frankly I'm getting sick to my stomach.

The notion that the average citizen can't be trusted to evaluate an incident involving the police is bullshit. The average citizen knows that cops have a difficult job and knows accidents happen. But the average citizen can also see through bullshit, which is what you are afraid of. And one more thing: you claim that if it came down to a civilian reviewing your decisions you'd quit. But isn't that what happens anyways if you end up in Court? Your career hinges on what between 1 and 12 civilians will say.


And yet, in many of those cases, police unions praise the officer and blame the victim (or use the victim's past history, or his circumstances, or any number of other factors) to whitewash the situation. And in many of those cases, nothing happens to the officers. Just to give you one example: I'm pretty sure a 5 year old would say that forcibly medicating someone repeatedly, making them defecate in front of you, x-raying him repeatedly and giving him a colonoscopy is wrong. And yet that's what happened to David Eckert and guess what? The cops that did this still on their job.

So apparently there are things we can all agree are wrong, except... we apparently disagree when it comes time to agree.


It's always easy to hide behind the "you can't judge what I do until you've walked a mile in my shoes." Bullshit. You (not you specifically - just being general) just don't want to be judged because you think you're above it.

I refuse to admit this post sums things up PERFECTLY.
































Ok...I admit it.











I have nothing to offer.  I am ashamed.

[illuminati]

Agnostic007
I have to say Agnostic you are clearly showing the signs of thinking you are Better than us.
us being the public.
you are employed by the public & answer to the public.

Yet again you answered a reply to my post & not addressed my points.

Avxo's  reply 2355 does sum it up very very well.

You keep hiding behind The public don't know / can't make the right decisions, What like all cops
Are of Superior intelligence....No, are they even average intelligence judging by the actions we
Keep hearing of I doubt it.

And just like you & every other cop the Public would very soon learn.
Any points of law could be explained by a lawyer, barrister , judge, or professor of law.

What are you afraid of, ?? (& Cops in general)
Is it not being able to hide behind the Police Badge, & to be fully accountable & punishable for their lying, beating, evidence destroying, inhumane treatment, bad driving, & murdering.

It appears the police are seriously afraid of not having the Deck stacked in their favour.

I wish you well as change will happen.

Your statement  'That's as Good as it Going to get' is not only Offensive to me it show your contempt for the public & either resistance or inability to Accept Things are Very Very Wrong From Top to Bottom With Policing and changes need happen sooner rather than later.



I do give you that you at least come on here & fight the police corner.
And try to offer explanations & answers to most posts.
 

[Agnostic007]

No. The police aren't in a position to allow or disallow anything. They're public servants who will do as they are told and operate within the framework setup by their bosses: the public. If they don't like working under those terms then they should quit.


Of course. I lack the knowledge, background, training and experience to shove guns in people's mouths, throw flashbangs into cribs, shoot sleeping seven year old girl in the head, smash people's phones because they contain recording of a shoot-out, severely injure inmates or people in custody, cause almost fatal car crash and have the victim arrested and charged and I could go on, but frankly I'm getting sick to my stomach.

The notion that the average citizen can't be trusted to evaluate an incident involving the police is bullshit. The average citizen knows that cops have a difficult job and knows accidents happen. But the average citizen can also see through bullshit, which is what you are afraid of. And one more thing: you claim that if it came down to a civilian reviewing your decisions you'd quit. But isn't that what happens anyways if you end up in Court? Your career hinges on what between 1 and 12 civilians will say.


And yet, in many of those cases, police unions praise the officer and blame the victim (or use the victim's past history, or his circumstances, or any number of other factors) to whitewash the situation. And in many of those cases, nothing happens to the officers. Just to give you one example: I'm pretty sure a 5 year old would say that forcibly medicating someone repeatedly, making them defecate in front of you, x-raying him repeatedly and giving him a colonoscopy is wrong. And yet that's what happened to David Eckert and guess what? The cops that did this still on their job.

So apparently there are things we can all agree are wrong, except... we apparently disagree when it comes time to agree.


It's always easy to hide behind the "you can't judge what I do until you've walked a mile in my shoes." Bullshit. You (not you specifically - just being general) just don't want to be judged because you think you're above it.

Like I said, we'll just have to disagree

[Agnostic007]

Agnostic007
I have to say Agnostic you are clearly showing the signs of thinking you are Better than us.
us being the public.
you are employed by the public & answer to the public.

Yet again you answered a reply to my post & not addressed my points.

Avxo's  reply 2355 does sum it up very very well.

You keep hiding behind The public don't know / can't make the right decisions, What like all cops
Are of Superior intelligence....No, are they even average intelligence judging by the actions we
Keep hearing of I doubt it.

And just like you & every other cop the Public would very soon learn.
Any points of law could be explained by a lawyer, barrister , judge, or professor of law.

What are you afraid of, ?? (& Cops in general)
Is it not being able to hide behind the Police Badge, & to be fully accountable & punishable for their lying, beating, evidence destroying, inhumane treatment, bad driving, & murdering.

It appears the police are seriously afraid of not having the Deck stacked in their favour.

I wish you well as change will happen.

Your statement  'That's as Good as it Going to get' is not only Offensive to me it show your contempt for the public & either resistance or inability to Accept Things are Very Very Wrong From Top to Bottom With Policing and changes need happen sooner rather than later.



I do give you that you at least come on here & fight the police corner.
And try to offer explanations & answers to most posts.
 

Can't help that you feel that way. I wouldn't begin to tell a certified mechanic how to diagnose an engine problem.. I don't have the training, experience etc. Civilians don't sit on Doctor review panels, they have other doctors and people in that field sit on them, for the same reason. I'm not equating policing to brain surgery, I am saying it's a specialized occupation. If that comes across as "better than you" sorry

[whork]

We'll always disagree on the point of who makes the final decision.. I'd quit today if my career hinged on the decisions of civilians. I could work with a group of former police officers turned monitors. Trust me, if I was a citizen with no police experience I would think just the same way, "why can't citizens review incidents and allegations and come to the right conclusion? The police must be hiding something if they won't allow that" But the truth is the average citizen just doesn't have the required knowledge, background, training and experience to make the tough calls. We can all agree the Rodney King beating was horrible. We can all agree that the officer shooting the guy in the back running away was excessive to say the least, there are those cases where a 5 yr old can tell you it's wrong. I'm talking about the ones that aren't clear cut and without that background, knowledge, experience and training, would conclude the wrong answer.  We're just going to have to agree to disagree on that

You arrest people all day, put them in jail so they can be judged by a jury of civilians.

Yet civilians is not worthy of judging you

This is hypocracy and shows an "us vs them" mentality that is rampant in the police force.

[Agnostic007]

You arrest people all day, put them in jail so they can be judged by a jury of civilians.

Yet civilians is not worthy of judging you

This is hypocracy and shows an "us vs them" mentality that is rampant in the police force.

I suppose doctors and mechanics and airline pilots and just about any profession you can imagine with specialized training have an "us v them" mentality

[Agnostic007]

You arrest people all day, put them in jail so they can be judged by a jury of civilians.

Yet civilians is not worthy of judging you

This is hypocracy and shows an "us vs them" mentality that is rampant in the police force.

Whork, it's not about "judging me" its about do they have the information, training, experience, knowledge and back ground to determine if the force used during that particular incident was within policy, the law and reason. I have not been too reassured that they are the best source for that given the comments I see on certain incidents. I understand you disagree.. that's fine.

[Skeletor]

Aren't civilian review panels supposed to review the relevant laws and policies and how they were (or not) applied to a particular case? Similar to a jury (where the careers-and lives-of all us can hinge on the decisions of -gasp- civilians). And in some panels, the decisions (or recommendations) have no effect on the cops or the PD/SD (contrary to what a cop can do: detain or arrest even for bogus reasons only to have the charges dropped).

While lowly scum citizens can't see it, an officer with a Doctorate in Policing can discern the danger that hides behind the fragile facade of a 90 year old lady in her walker that makes even seasoned officers fear for their lives. And for all the "citizens just don't know" argument, one could also say about cops serving in these panels that they protect their ilk, they're union goons, have conflict of interest etc. Citizens (with no connections to law enforcement) should have participation in police overview panels.


The whole "police officers would quit if they had to suffer actual consequences when they mess up, face the same treatment as citizens, pay out of their pockets instead of making taxpayers pay, be transparent and accountable" just shows that while they are doing an often dangerous job, they don't want to be held accountable and to the same standards as others.

Oh while we're at it: "When a cop shows up, you're not the one in charge, I don't care if it's your house":

VIDEO: Cops Illegally Break into Innocent Woman’s Home While She’s Naked, Assault and Arrest Her

Chandler, AZ — In March, Esmeralda Rossi was in the shower when two cops came to the door.

“I was in the shower,” Rossi said. “My daughter came to the shower and said there are two officers at the door. So I just grabbed a towel.”

Rossi had committed no crime, the police had no warrant, and they were only responding to a call about an argument between her and her estranged husband. However, these cops acted like they were raiding the home of a mass murderer.

Upon answering the door, Rossi was met by two police officers as she stood there in a towel. Not wanted to be gawked at while naked by two strangers, Rossi turned around to go put on some clothes.

“It made me very uncomfortable,” Rossi said. “So I closed the door. I turn to go into my living room, and I probably get about five steps in; and all of a sudden, I just hear boots running in after me, telling me stop or I’ll arrest you.”

At this point is when Rossi’s daughter and Rossi began filming.

Both officers illegally entered Rossi’s home, without probable cause. One of the officers, Doug Rose, then proceeded to assault Rossi.

As Rose attempts to illegally arrest this completely innocent woman, her completely nude body is exposed. But that did not stop this cop from continuing his assault.

“You have absolutely no clothes on?” this sex offending cop asks as he continues his attack. In the meantime, his partner stands idly by as he watches his fellow officer attack a naked woman.

Rossi was finally subdued by this monster and handcuffed, completely nude. However, she was never charged with a crime.

“This was not the proper treatment of a citizen,” said Marc Victor, Rossi’s attorney. “This was disgusting. This was barbaric.”

“Any one of us would be upset if a police officer barged into our homes without permission,” Victor said. “She had a right to be upset.”

According to ABC 15 News, after reviewing the incident, Chandler Police internal investigators determined Rose entered the home illegally and without probable cause. The investigation also determined that Rose didn’t document arresting or un-arresting the woman or the fact that she was naked.

Officer Rose was also wearing a body camera. However, it conveniently failed to record this particular interaction.

According to police records, Rose’s partner who contacted his supervisors to “raise questions about Rose’s actions,” was cleared of any wrongdoing.

Since the launch of the investigation, Rose retired which is likely a cautionary move to avoid additional charges.

http://thefreethoughtproject.com/video-cops-illegally-break-innocent-womans-home-naked-assault-arrest/

[whork]

I suppose doctors and mechanics and airline pilots and just about any profession you can imagine with specialized training have an "us v them" mentality

Maybe so but those people, if caught in a crime will get punished according to the law.

Cops can kill you, try to cover it up and still walk unlike the people you mentioned.

[whork]

Whork, it's not about "judging me" its about do they have the information, training, experience, knowledge and back ground to determine if the force used during that particular incident was within policy, the law and reason. I have not been too reassured that they are the best source for that given the comments I see on certain incidents. I understand you disagree.. that's fine.

Well that settles it then.

Just ignore all the dead people shoot by cops in this thread. As long as you feel assured.

[Agnostic007]

Well that settles it then.

Just ignore all the dead people shoot by cops in this thread. As long as you feel assured.

yep.. that's pretty much it

[illuminati]

Agnostic 007.
Thank you for being good enough to come on here and argue you're points.

You come across as a reasoned & intelligent man.

I don't see how though you can keep trying to defend the indefensible
Clearly there are several other Reasoned & intelligent people on here
And they are making some very Good Factual Points.

None of us like to have our ideologies/ thoughts / beliefs questioned Let alone Proven Wrong.
Is this the case for you why you can't see or accept what others are saying.

As I have said before,  No 'this is not as good as its going to get' yet you have said it is.
I find very difficult To take on board & would dearly hope a serving policeman Would not & Should
not Have that Mind set & view point.

If that is a commonly held view by cops, (which I hope it isn't)
1. We are all doomed
2. It kind of explains most of what we are seeing & hearing at the hands of cops.

[avxo]

Like I said, we'll just have to disagree

The problem is why we disagree: from where I stand, it's because you're trying to maintain the untenable and irrational position that the police are above the law, and that the only people that can judge the police are the police themselves and if the public doesn't like that the public can get stuffed.

Whork, it's not about "judging me" its about do they have the information, training, experience, knowledge and back ground to determine if the force used during that particular incident was within policy, the law and reason. I have not been too reassured that they are the best source for that given the comments I see on certain incidents. I understand you disagree.. that's fine.

It is only about judging you. That's the whole problem. You believe that a bunch of civilians who lack "information, training, experience, knowledge and background" should judge you. You say, that they shouldn't determine if the force used was within policy, the law and reason. So let's look at those claims one by one:

• Policy: I assume that all relevant policies are written out and contain directions. I see no reason why only cops can interpret those directions, especially when you consider that all too frequently, they seem to interpret them incorrectly.
• Law: Cops are neither lawyers nor judges and many cops are about as qualified to opine on what is and isn't legal as your average illegal immigrant housekeeper.
• Reason: Reason and common sense aren't attributes exclusive to cops. You don't magically become reasonable when someone pins a badge or you, nor are the rest of us devoid of common sense.

So if those three are the issues, then there should be no problem with civilian oversight. It's not like the oversight will result in firing after firing after firing of cops - and if it does, something is very very wrong somewhere; as I said in a previous post, most people are reasonable and understand that the police have a difficult job that sometimes calls for snap decisions and that accidents, terrible as they might be, happen. And if those three issues are, indeed, a problem, then we have bigger fish to fry because the jury system is horribly broken and we should just replace jurors with a panel of cops.

You are a reasonable guy and I am sure that you are a good cop and a decent human being, and even you have this "us vs. them" mentality: cops vs the public that employs you, a public that you seem to think is beneath you and should not be allowed to criticize or judge you. And if you have thise mentality, what what about the many cops who are neither as decent nor as good as you?

You say that you can't allow your job to be at the hands of civilians. But isn't it already? Couldn't the public vote to fire you today? And for any reason, even for no reason at all! Listen, the facts are simple: you don't have a right to a badge, you don't have the right to a job and you don't have a right to be above the law. If the citizens want oversight of the police, they deserve oversight of the police, and if you don't like that's too bad. But if you would quit if the citizens demanded to have that oversight, then that says a whole lot about you in particular and police in general.

[Agnostic007]

Agnostic 007.
Thank you for being good enough to come on here and argue you're points.

You come across as a reasoned & intelligent man.

I don't see how though you can keep trying to defend the indefensible
Clearly there are several other Reasoned & intelligent people on here
And they are making some very Good Factual Points.

None of us like to have our ideologies/ thoughts / beliefs questioned Let alone Proven Wrong.
Is this the case for you why you can't see or accept what others are saying.

As I have said before,  No 'this is not as good as its going to get' yet you have said it is.
I find very difficult To take on board & would dearly hope a serving policeman Would not & Should
not Have that Mind set & view point.

If that is a commonly held view by cops, (which I hope it isn't)
1. We are all doomed
2. It kind of explains most of what we are seeing & hearing at the hands of cops.

Thanks for the kind words.  When I said, that's as good as it gets I meant this:

In devising a system where police actions are reviewed after the fact, there needs to be a review by people who know what it's like to be in similar situations. No 2 incidents are exactly alike, but there are many similarities in all of them. You cannot have someone who thinks shooting an armed person in the leg is the right answer reviewing police actions in a use of force situation. But you also need that process monitored by informed citizens to insure fairness and thoroughness. Without that, it leaves the door open for internal corruption or the perception of internal corruption which is just as bad. The final answer is decided by citizens, in the form of a jury, but the decision to discipline should be made by the Chief who is hired and fired by a civilian city manager.

In my opinion, that's as good as it gets. I can't think of a better system at the moment. Maybe one will be devised in the future as technology advances, but at this time, that's pretty good. And I concede there are departments that don't have OPM or civilian review boards and I think that is a mistake. I think it is a plus for the department and the citizens to have one.

 

[Agnostic007]

The problem is why we disagree: from where I stand, it's because you're trying to maintain the untenable and irrational position that the police are above the law, and that the only people that can judge the police are the police themselves and if the public doesn't like that the public can get stuffed.


It is only about judging you. That's the whole problem. You believe that a bunch of civilians who lack "information, training, experience, knowledge and background" should judge you. You say, that they shouldn't determine if the force used was within policy, the law and reason. So let's look at those claims one by one:

• Policy: I assume that all relevant policies are written out and contain directions. I see no reason why only cops can interpret those directions, especially when you consider that all too frequently, they seem to interpret them incorrectly.
• Law: Cops are neither lawyers nor judges and many cops are about as qualified to opine on what is and isn't legal as your average illegal immigrant housekeeper.
• Reason: Reason and common sense aren't attributes exclusive to cops. You don't magically become reasonable when someone pins a badge or you, nor are the rest of us devoid of common sense.

So if those three are the issues, then there should be no problem with civilian oversight. It's not like the oversight will result in firing after firing after firing of cops - and if it does, something is very very wrong somewhere; as I said in a previous post, most people are reasonable and understand that the police have a difficult job that sometimes calls for snap decisions and that accidents, terrible as they might be, happen. And if those three issues are, indeed, a problem, then we have bigger fish to fry because the jury system is horribly broken and we should just replace jurors with a panel of cops.

You are a reasonable guy and I am sure that you are a good cop and a decent human being, and even you have this "us vs. them" mentality: cops vs the public that employs you, a public that you seem to think is beneath you and should not be allowed to criticize or judge you. And if you have thise mentality, what what about the many cops who are neither as decent nor as good as you?

You say that you can't allow your job to be at the hands of civilians. But isn't it already? Couldn't the public vote to fire you today? And for any reason, even for no reason at all! Listen, the facts are simple: you don't have a right to a badge, you don't have the right to a job and you don't have a right to be above the law. If the citizens want oversight of the police, they deserve oversight of the police, and if you don't like that's too bad. But if you would quit if the citizens demanded to have that oversight, then that says a whole lot about you in particular and police in general.

I'm sorry if you have concluded by my responses I feel cops are above the law. That is not the case. I feel cops should be held to a higher standard than the average citizen. I also know that the duties of the job can and does put officers in some bad situations and most try and make the best decision at the moment. Those that intentionally act maliciously like kicking a handcuffed prisoner in the head, or "brake checking" an unseat belted person should be punished to the maximum allowable.

To the point of the only people who can judge the police are the police themselves I'll say, the police are in the best position to judge an officers actions that resulted in use of force. If you are concerned about impartiality, the OPM can address that issue.

As far as the three areas highlighted. ..

Policy- Yes, you can certainly teach anyone policy. But policy is many cases is a guide since there is no policy book written that will cover all circumstances a cop will encounter and there are often times policy is circumvented and the reasons are considered valid. Arguing why policy should have been circumvented in that case to someone without the experience could be an issue.

Legal- we agree

Reasonable- This is the big one. Was the force used at that particular moment by that person in that particular situation reasonable? Well, without having been in that particular situation you may think one thing.. someone who has been in that situation will think another. It's not reason itself a citizen lacks because as you said, you just don't get reason with the pinning of a badge.. but applying the reason to a given situation in a force situation, especially a gray area, would be difficult without that experience. You can disagree and I respect that but I have witnessed it enough to feel comfortable saying it.

The us against them mentality in my opinion is somewhat of a misdirection. Because I think police are more qualified to judge police actions due to their training, experience etc is not an us vs them mentality.

And no.. I'm not a sheriff. The public couldn't vote to fire me today. There are civil service protections against that.

Look, I don't think citizens are beneath me. I'm a citizen. I love citizens. I encourage civilian oversight.   

[Skip8282]

Another excellent example of why police can't police themselves.  These officers have been cleared and they fought the fuck out of releasing the video.  Can't imagine why. 

[whork]

Another excellent example of why police can't police themselves.  These officers have been cleared and they fought the fuck out of releasing the video.  Can't imagine why. 

You are just a stupid civilian Skip, you cant judge these heroes.

[Skip8282]

You are just a stupid civilian Skip, you cant judge these heroes.

3 boney little kids that you could thump with one hand, but THREE cops claiming they were so petrified for their lives that they had to gun him down.  Oh boy. 

[Skeletor]

Another excellent example of why police can't police themselves.  These officers have been cleared and they fought the fuck out of releasing the video.  Can't imagine why. 

"Action beats reaction every time", "they feared for their lives", "you weren't there man", etc..